Why “Pseudepigraphal” Writings?
To today’s readers the notion of a falsely ascribed literary work can carry
with it the connotation of “forgery.” It is precisely this caricature that has
made it difficult for religious communities to value “pseudepigrapha” for
their theological ideas. To be sure, in antiquity a writer’s use of another
name was sometimes criticized, and the criterion of authenticity or
nonauthenticity could be invoked as a reason, respectively, for a book’s in-
clusion or noninclusion among sacred traditions. Josephus in the first cen-
turyc.e., for example, treated the book of Daniel as written during the
Babylonian exile by a prophet of that name; since what he prophesied
about the Greeks’ accession to power came true through the conquests of
Alexander the Great, the “books” of Daniel (i.e., including the additions
preserved in Greek) are to be found “among the sacred writings” (Ant.
10.210; cf. 10.190-281; 11.337-38; 12.322). Furthermore, insofar as1 Enoch,for
example, was treated as coming from the patriarch Enoch himself, it could
be regarded as scripture (Epistle of Barnabas4:3; 16:5-6; Tertullian,De
Cultu Feminarum3,De Idololatria4; cf. Jude 14-15) or at least highly valued
(Irenaeus,Adversus Haereses4.16; Clement of Alexandria,Eclogae Prophe-
tarum2 and 53; Anatolius of Alexandria,Paschal Canon5; Ethiopic Ortho-
dox tradition), even though the main criterion for value was based more
on the importance accorded to the contents of the book. On the other
hand, as noted above, spuriousness was frequently held out by Jews and
Christians as a reason to reject the use of certain writings (Tertullian,De
Cultu Feminarum3; cf. Origen,Contra Celsum5.54; Augustine,De Civitate
Dei18.38).
For all the growing worry about pseudepigraphy expressed by Jewish
and Christian writers during the first centuries of the Common Era, it re-
mains true that the phenomenon itself was not only widespread but also
widely received. This was so much the case that the notion of false ascrip-
tion to authors could not be applied as a criterion for rejection in every
case; the use of some books in faith communities had, for various reasons,
gained an irreversible momentum. The main question to ask, however, is
why pseudepigraphy was so popular, that is, why so many in antiquity were
prepared to write under the name of an important personage. To this
question several answers may be given.
First, libraries such as the great one in Alexandria were keen to collect
copies of works by well-known writers. In response to such advertising, a
supply of writings could be produced for purchase that met this demand.193Apocrypha and PseudepigraphaEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:04:02 PM